test content
Logo
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc
Boff Slot Swap Request
flash525
Member Posts: 5,441 Arc User
I thought I posted this a week or two ago, though I can't find it within history, so it's quite possible I forgot to hit the submit option.
Anyway, this post comes via a request (or at the very least; an idea) that I wouldn't mind seeing implemented. What I'd like is a C-Store Token that enables any given player to switch two Boff Slots on any given ship. I know some people would likely use the Galaxy or Defiant more if that third career-specific slot was something different.
I'm not asking for a fleet of ships with universal consoles, no. I'm simply asking for the option to allow one bridge officer slot to be switched for another (per token); so it's a one time use.
Lets take the Star Cruiser as an example (I'm bias here cause I want a new Star Cruiser) though this serves the purpose.
The Fleet Star Cruiser currently has the following:
Lieutenant Tactical
Commander Engineering
Lt. Commander Engineering
Lieutenant Science
Ensign Science
With said token, I would be able to switch say ... the Lt. Cmd Engineering with the Lieutenant Science, thus having a Lt. Cmd Science and Lieutenant Engineering.
Various restrictions could be put into place, maybe restrict Commander Slots (they're usually the core for any specific ship), and you could restrict any ship that has a universal boff slot; just because they've already got allowed free variety. You'd also restrict the movement of two Boffs only per any ship (save people changing too much from the core intention).
This suggestion is just something that would help people who maybe would like to play with their favourite ship but don't currently do so because of boff restrictions. It's no secret that Engineering ships with three Engineering Boffs suffer somewhat because of cooldowns. This would be a further plus for them.
But yeah, that's pretty much the idea. Sound like something other people would like to see?
Anyway, this post comes via a request (or at the very least; an idea) that I wouldn't mind seeing implemented. What I'd like is a C-Store Token that enables any given player to switch two Boff Slots on any given ship. I know some people would likely use the Galaxy or Defiant more if that third career-specific slot was something different.
I'm not asking for a fleet of ships with universal consoles, no. I'm simply asking for the option to allow one bridge officer slot to be switched for another (per token); so it's a one time use.
Lets take the Star Cruiser as an example (I'm bias here cause I want a new Star Cruiser) though this serves the purpose.
The Fleet Star Cruiser currently has the following:
Lieutenant Tactical
Commander Engineering
Lt. Commander Engineering
Lieutenant Science
Ensign Science
With said token, I would be able to switch say ... the Lt. Cmd Engineering with the Lieutenant Science, thus having a Lt. Cmd Science and Lieutenant Engineering.
Various restrictions could be put into place, maybe restrict Commander Slots (they're usually the core for any specific ship), and you could restrict any ship that has a universal boff slot; just because they've already got allowed free variety. You'd also restrict the movement of two Boffs only per any ship (save people changing too much from the core intention).
This suggestion is just something that would help people who maybe would like to play with their favourite ship but don't currently do so because of boff restrictions. It's no secret that Engineering ships with three Engineering Boffs suffer somewhat because of cooldowns. This would be a further plus for them.
But yeah, that's pretty much the idea. Sound like something other people would like to see?
Post edited by flash525 on
0
Comments
Maybe the Devs don't want the Defiant or the Galaxy classes to be more flexible. The Devs make a lot of choices about the game based on their own biases or indifference. Maybe they are starting to run out of ideas to make new ships interesting when it comes to BOFF layouts. I don't think a simple new BOFF arrangement at this point would have made the new science destroyer interesting. I also think they have exhausted the possible BOFF layouts already so maybe they should consider this.
Think of all the players that would consider buying old c-store ships that most have forgotten about. If the tokens to do this were "reasonably priced" people might buy them all the time to change their ships on a whim. Maybe they could make more money selling tokens to switch boff seats than selling new ships.
The way I see it, Cryptic could make a killing with such tokens, all whilst still releasing new ships. As mentioned by saiwot, some people would likely go back to their older ships if they were able to mix things up a little. Some people might even buy a couple more. I'd purchase quite a few fleet ships if I had more variety with their boff abilities and locations.
There's still the look and stats (inc consoles) of a vessel to take into account.
By having ships locked to their layouts, it gives a ship an identity within the game - as well as expectations when playing with or against them. Conversely, I can totally understand having a desire to use a specific ships, but it not having the ideal layout for how you want to use it.
I think the Dyson Science Destroyers have set a precedence and will probably be the best compromise moving forward.
As to the example you've given specifically, OP, I think the closest ships to that are the Fleet Ambassador and the Mirror Heavy Cruiser that just came out(although they both trade the En Sci for an En Tac).
This changes your basic understanding of the game. Oh no the sky is falling!
This idea doesn't turn an escort into a cruiser or a science ship into an escort. That is what I think is the most important and the OP's idea doesn't affect that. This whole argument that you need to know what you are up against is bogus. "Oh, that guy is in that ship so I know I can take him out." Maybe the game is too predictable and ships are too pigeonholed. Look at the poor Galaxy Class type.
If/When a PvP revamp occurs, there could be the option of 'play with customized' or 'play with default' for match selection. If the former is selected, then players would be able to enter said arena with their token-ed ships; boff slots switched. If the latter, then (at least for the duration of the PvP match) ships would default to their original/intended boff setup.
This would allow PvPers to specific whether they want a true challenge, or whether they want to know exactly what they're fighting.
The Star Cruiser is just an unrealistic hope (though one that would be possible with said proposal). There are several ships I'd seriously invest in though if they weren't so fixed, not just the Star Cruiser.
Really though, I'm not knocking the idea, I like it and would love to be able to 'adjust' the layout of some of the ships that I enjoy flying(would love to kick the En Tac on my Armitage to a Sci for tractor beam). It's just that I also think there are good reasons for it stay the way it is as well - ship identification and more desirable layouts for future ships that directly support the game.
If these tokens could be implemented as described, then I would expect numerous purchases by many people. There's also the option that some people might purchase a second one to reconfigure a ship again (and again); endless possibilities.
Cryptic are (hopefully) always going to have new ships to release, though considering the work that went into some of the older ones, it would be nice to see people playing with them again. Take the Galaxy for example, the T5 Retrofit comes with three ENG boff slots, few people favor that setup so don't use it. If a switch was enabled, then more people would use it, some of which might even spend an additional 1500zen on the Venture skin. That's more profit for Cryptic.
I don't know.... It just seems like Boff stations and consoles are part of a larger picture.
I don't think that they always hit the mark, but Boff slots, consoles, hull, turn rate, devices, and on and on are all part of the balancing act.
An engineering Boff, science Boff, and tactical Boff may all be seen as basically equal, but the allotment of these officers makes a huge difference in a ship's ability.
A tactical commander may be equal to a science commander or engineering commander, but a tactical commander, lt. commander, and engineer are not equal to a tac commander, sci lt. cmdr, and eng lt.
if players wanted to do that they can already fly:
Mobius Temporal Destroyer (universal slot)
Solanae Class Science Destroyer (still has Lt. commander science in tact mode)
Chimera Heavy Destroyer (universal slot)
Multi-Vector Advanced Escort
along whit fleet versions when available.
ships like this would probably be flown more if it made such a I win button...
First of all it's not even a crafting system! It's just a dumb game system that's nothing more than a glorified slots machine.
second the "special items" you hope will be the saving the saving grace are messed up to.
I do think lt.cmd and cmd stations should be left well alone otherwise you really do have to look at all other stats on the ship.
personally in the case off some of the mentioned ships I believe that fleet versions should have more flexibility. if they don't have them they should get an ensign or lt universal slot.
I was about to say something like this.
What is better the multi-vector advanced escort with a LCDR SCI or the tactical escort retrofit? I think the only honest argument that could be made against this idea is that players would more often than not use ships with less effective boff setups and be less effective in game. Most ships are usually balanced in favor of whatever setups they already have and changing these setups could make them weaker. Abilities would be weaker on ships that do not have the right console configuration. The MVAE doesn't have 4 ENG consoles and 1 SCI console to balance the LCDR SCI does it?
1) P2W. It would most surely enhance some ships to be P2W. For example, take that Galaxy or Defiant you were referring to. You can only get those ships at level 50 if somebody in the game (not necesseraly you, but somebody) makes a Zen purchase to get the ship, to get dilithium or to get EC (Fleet Modules). So they are already something of a P2W. However, by then further restricting their powerfullness behind a second Zen purchase, this one forced on you or the Dilithium Exchange player, you would make a P2W group within a P2W group. P2Wception. And that is a concept I have to oppose.
2) It would further loosen the function of the ship. For example, the Galaxy-R is a massive Tank in its current form. When a player enters a PUG STF and sees that Galaxy-R, he expects to be able to lure a Cube to that Galaxy, so that the Galaxy can take its damage while the player works on destroying the Cube. This will obviously never happen in premade teams made of 5+k players, but in some low-damage DPS runs, both me and my team are happy that I can take all the damage in the map with my Excelsior and occasionally throw out a heal. Now, if the Galaxy would be allowed to get, say, a lt cmd tactical. It would change the very function of the ship, making it much more damage and much less tanking orientated. If the player that wants to lure a cube to the Galaxy doesn't know this, he just might end up getting both himself and the Galaxy killed.
3) The time to develop this. If I understand anything from the ingame coding at all, then it is that each ship class has its own code for boff stations, that restrict what powers may be used on a particular station (say the Galaxy is programmed to only accept 3 engineering powers in its Lt. Cmd. slot). By changing a boff station, you would be changing the very code of the ship. That can mean only 2 things: either the code reworks to implement a total new ship class just for you, which can have unpredicted consequenses with every part of the ship or the entire game, such as bugs. Or 2, the ship mutates for every player in the game, which would permanently cause frustration with this feature. To circumvent these nasty effects, there would have to be a huge amount of development time in this feature. And personally, I want the Devs to focuss on something else than this.
4) It would not be dealing with the actual problem of these ships. Again, take the Galaxy. The Galaxy in its current forms has 2 issues: engineering abilities are too much alike and thus share too much cooldowns, which makes a lot of engineering powers very difficult to work around. And 2, the Galaxy is about tanking in a game which evolves around DPS. Changing a boff station on the Galaxy might help with the issues the Galaxy itself faces. But you would be treating a sympton, not the disease. What should happen to make certain ships viable with their current setup is a total re-evaluation of the current boff powers, and implementing new content that is not about killing NPC's as fast as you can.
Due to these reasons, I cannot vote anything else but no on your idea.
Join the Deltas today!
This probably would have been a better argument when the only ships with universals were birds of prey. Once the flood gates were opened with the most powerful ships in the entire game right off the bat packing two of those things however, it changed the entire dynamics of the way we look at ships. For better or for worse, that is the game we are left with and now we have to adapt accordingly.
Or not.
WOW! I think you have changed my mind. The OP's idea is a terrible because.......
1) Players will spend money on this game thinking they will win more often.
2) Someone will try to use a game play mechanic at the wrong time in the wrong place and fail.
3) A developer will have to write code for the game. Writing code for a game can take time and be inconvenient for them.
4) I think the game has other problems that are more important to me.
There are already P2W ships for those that care enough to purchase them. I don't see what difference this would make for the majority of players. It is my understanding (correct or not) that the majority aren't the PvP community.
On the contrary, I believe it would extend the function of said ship. Players wouldn't need to alter the initial thought process behind any design. If they wanted a true tank Galaxy, they'd still be able to have one.
My knowledge of programming is limited, however I have done some back during my college years. If your knowledge of the Cryptic Boff System is correct, then it sounds like a bit of a mess.
Perhaps, but then it would be a welcome compromise.
Didn't come up on my search. Thanks though!
Ships like that would probably be flown more if everyone could just go to the ship vendor and buy them with EC or get them for free with a promotion.
Lobi, not really an escort, veteran reward, C-store, and requiring a fleet and whatever else. Not a single standard ship on your list.
But it's not just the Boff arrangement, it's the Boff arrangement along with the hull, turn rate, consoles, and whatever other special things a ship may have going for it.
I took one fairly obvious, and despite what you may think, popular and effective tactic, and used it as an example.
But hey, if they charge 2500 Zen for such a token then there probably isn't much argument left.
The player is paying basically for a whole different ship at that point, so switching a couple of Boff slots probably isn't a big deal.
Whether it is technically feasible or not is a different matter.